Towards
Development: International donors, Agenda Setting and the Participation of the
Non-Profit Sector in NEPAD
Bhekinkosi
Moyo[1]
PAPER
TO BE PRESENTED TO CODESRIA’S 10TH CONGRESS, 8-12 DECEMBER, 2002,
KAMPALA, UGANDA
Executive summary
The
importance of civil society’s participation in Africa’s development
models, such as the New Partnership for Africa’s Development demands
attention. The following lines discuss the role and importance of civil
society in paving the path to development in Africa. Using South Africa as the
focal point, this paper looks at the size and scope of the non-profit sector
to arrive at the conclusion that an exclusion of civil society in the
development enterprise is one step forward and two steps backward. The extent
to which Africa is underdeveloped demands an integrated approach to
development. Development should be people centred and inclusive of all
stakeholders. Drawing from the
experience of South Africa, this paper projects the arguments to other African
countries. The political liberalization, in South Africa, facilitated the
development of a new relational state-society paradigm.
New questions emerged also about the nature of development in the new
democratic South Africa. Civil society faced new challenges that caused the
failure of many to adapt. However,
others survived and reoriented themselves to address the development question,
which has occupied all major actors in political and economic forums. While
there has been agreement on issues such as citizenship, the nature of the
nation state, the economic role of the state, etc, there have been differences
on the development question. It has always been assumed that state, the
private sector and the non-profit sector have roles to play in development.
But how these various components fit together has been the serious challenge.
More often, the tendency has been to focus on the state and the private
sector at the expense of the non-profit sector. This tendency provided the
rationale for this discussion, which argues strongly for the inclusion of
civil society, (and its development partners) in the development equation.
Overwhelming evidence from recent studies about the non-profit sector in South
Africa and other countries in the world, testify that the sector is a major
boost to development and economic growth. Its role is evident as early as the
1980s, when civil society organizations mushroomed in the form of NGOs, NPOs,
community based organizations and voluntary organizations. There are even more
popular today in service delivery and development programs.
So critical are CSOs in development that their exclusion is
counter-productive as has happened in the past (for example, the Growth,
Employment and Redistribution Strategy, in South Africa). In order not to be
trapped in the same error, this discussion uses the African Union’s NEPAD to
illustrate the necessity of the inclusion of civil society in development.
This is because Nepad is the hottest news currently and a development model
that Africa is pushing to achieve sustainable development. As a continental
model, Nepad must draw its strength from the African people. And the
responsibility for creating the conditions for development, i.e., ending
conflict, improving economic and political governance as well as strengthening
regional integration, must rest with the people. It must be an African agenda
expressing Africa’s determination to achieve the Millennium Development
Goals.[2]
Introduction
By
way of introduction, this paper reiterates that Africa is a scar on the
conscience of the world, despite the numerous resources in it[3]. Poverty is deeper and more entrenched in Africa than
anywhere else in the world. Half the population in Africa lives on $1 dollar a
day. The population is growing faster than the economies[4]. The causes are numerous. They include the legacy of
colonialism, apartheid, the Cold War and inappropriate reform policies.
Reversing this negative growth of poverty and underdevelopment is the
challenge facing development practitioners. It is also a challenge facing
South Africa, Africa, civil society and Nepad. Other past development models
failed to reverse the situation and the hope is now on Nepad, whose task is
first, to reduce the impact of armed conflict on civilians. Second, it is to
increase economic growth in Africa. Third, and this is very crucial to Nepad
and its partnership with the G-8 and beyond, is fairer terms of trade. Fourth,
to encourage massive inward investment to improve Africa’s transport,
healthcare and communications infrastructure. And lastly, to invest in human
development.
The
discussion is divided into four main sections. These sections attempt to make
linkages between the different themes that run through the paper. First, is
the theme that, the non-profit sector is a force to reckon with and ignoring
it, is counter-productive. Second is the notion that Africa is highly
underdeveloped, despite the amount of attention and development aid that it
has received. This comes out clearly in the reading of section two and three
that look at the state of (under) development and development aid in Africa.
Last, is the illustration of the role that the non-profit sector can play in
the development enterprise. This is discussed in the context of the
relationship between donors and the NPO sector in South Africa and the New
Partnership for Africa’s Development.
Section
one
The
Non-Profit Sector in South Africa
While
this section does not seek to engage theoretically with the definition of
civil society and debates around it, it is nevertheless necessary to provide a
brief clarification of the terms used. In
general, third sector, non-governmental sector, voluntary sector, non-profit
sector, community based organizations and non-profit organizations have been
used synonymously. Loosely they are used to mean civil society. This paper
uses the term ‘non-profit sector’ to mean all those organizations that
have been defined, for example, by the CIVICUS-SANGOCO Project’s as,
Those
organizations and/or associations of organizations located between the family,
the state, the government of the day, and the prevailing economic system, in
which people with common interests associate voluntarily. Amongst these
organizations, they may have common, competing, or conflicting values and
interests. (Core/Idasa, 2001: 4)
In
addition this paper draws heavily from the recent study of South Africa’s
non-profit sector. According to this study, a nonprofit organization, defined
from a structural-operational paradigm, must be organized, private,
self-governing, non-profit distributing and voluntary.
These features agree with those of CIVICUS-SANGOCO study, which also
added the following: diversity; delivery oriented; needs driven;
like-mindedness, common interest and membership based or service oriented.[7]
The following fit the definition: CBOs, associations-networks of NGOs-CBOs,
trade unions and federations, professional associations, employer-business
associations and their federations, sports-arts-cultural organizations,
political parties, co-operatives, religious organizations and independent
research institutes.[8]
Development
NGOs have fast emerged throughout the world because they are believed to be
able to deliver resources to the grass roots more efficiently and effectively
than the state and the for-profit sector. A growing body of literature on
sustainable development points increasingly to the fact that both governments
and multilateral institutions court NGOs.[10]
The reasons for the interest in the NPO sector are diverse and not
always mutually compatible. One
of the most commonly mentioned reasons is the perception of the limitation of
the state as a vehicle for progressive social change due to the inability or
unwillingness of the state to be accountable to society. A second reason for
the interest on civil society reflects a greater willingness to recognize the
comparative advantage of NGOs to deliver at a local level. A 1998 World Bank
Evaluation Report noted that its experience had indicated that strong NGO/CBO
involvement in development projects significantly contributed to the
projects’ success, more particularly arising from providing opportunities
for poor and marginalized communities to participate in that development
(Clark 1999). This is reflected in the 1998 Johns Hopkins study which
stipulates, ‘the existence of a vibrant non-profit sector is increasingly
being viewed not as a luxury but as a necessity for peoples throughout the
world. Such institutions can give expression to citizens’ needs, hold
governments accountable, promote community, address unmet needs and generally
improve the quality of life.’ Such a depiction of civil society or the
non-profit sector and its size (just discussed below) call for its inclusion
in the development equation.
The size of the non-profit
sector
Section
two
The
state of under development[13]
Africa
today and yesterday
This section
discusses the state of development by drawing from statistical findings on
Africa in general and South Africa in particular. Africa entered the 21st
century with the baggage of poverty, the legacy of colonialism and some minute
gains. A classic example, of
these gains is education and life expectancy.
There is a body of research that supports the claim that education has
spread and life expectancy increased, though not to quality standards. In
addition, many countries enjoy civil liberties and political participation,
although in some countries there has been a reversal of the trend. Despotism
and anarchy, for example have rocked other countries. True, Africa has an ugly
face, but there are beautiful images as well.
According to
the Nepad document,
340
million people, or half the population, live on less than US$1 per day. The
mortality rate of children under five years of age is 140 per 1000, and life
expectancy at birth is only 54 years. Only 58 per cent of the population has
access to safe water. The rate of illiteracy for people over 15 is 41 per
cent. There are only 18 mainline telephones per 1000 people in Africa,
compared with 146 for the world as a whole and 567 for high-income countries
(Nepad document 2001:1).
And
according to World Bank studies, more than 200 million people have no access
to health services, more than 2million children die before their first
birthday.
In South
Africa, the situation is not different. According to Statistics South Africa,
between 1995 and 1999, the proportion of households living in informal
dwellings increased from 7,5% in 1995 to 12,3% in 1999, while those in formal
dwellings increased from 65,8% in the same years (1995 and 1999). On a
brighter side, there was a gradual increase in the proportion of households
that had access to clean water (piped water inside the dwelling or on site,
communal tap or public tanker). In 1995, 78,5% of households had access to
clean water, rising to 83,4% in 1999. At the same time there was a decrease in
the proportion of households using water from boreholes and rainwater tanks,
from 10,0% in 1995 to 4,7% in 1999. But the sad note is that the proportion of
those households obtaining water from rivers, streams and dams, remained
approximately constant over time (11,4% in 1995, and 11,8% in 1999), possibly
indicating that improved access to clean water had not significantly affected
previously disadvantaged households in deep rural areas. While more
than half of households in South Africa (55,4% in 1995 and 53,0% in 1999)
relied mainly on electricity for cooking from 1995 to 1999, this proportion
remained more or less constant between 1995 and 1999. Today various households
in the townships have had their electricity disconnected. The campaign by The
Anti- Privatization Forum and Soweto Electricity Crisis Campaign
gives an indication that there is a big proportion of households that have no
access to electricity. The overwhelming evidence supplied by Statistics South
Africa, shows that between 1995 and 1999, the proportion of households using
paraffin and other sources as coal, for cooking actually increased.
While there was improvement in the communication system (the proportion
of households with a telephone in the dwelling or a mobile telephone increased
from about 29,1% to about 34,9%) between 1995 and 1999, there wasn’t a
marked change in the proportions of households (55%) who had access to formal
refuse removal services.[14]
The
above figures show some of the changes that have occurred in South Africa.
These findings are mixed with gains and challenges. Most of these challenges
are not unique to South Africa; instead they reflect the general picture in
Africa. For example, more than 140 million youth in Africa are illiterate, and
more than one-quarter of poor, rural females attend primary school (World Bank
2000:10). According to Zeleza (2002), educational achievements of independent
Africa are as impressive as the challenges are intimidating. More schools and
universities were established in the first 25years after colonialism than in a
century of imperial rule. In 1960, only 9% of the African population was
literate, rising to about 50% three decades later. He says,
The
rapid expansion of education not only led to a massive improvement in the
African human capital, it also laid the institutional basis for the social
production of African intellectual capacities, communities and commitments.
But the constraints, contradictions and confusions of African education have
remained daunting; indeed they deepened as one country after another faced the
recessions of development and democracy, conditions exacerbated by the
imposition of draconian structural adjustment programmes, which threatened to
decompose the African social capital. Today Africa remains the least educated
continent in the world, able to provide higher education to only 3.5 per cent
of the college-age population, as compared with 60 per cent in the
industrialized countries.[15]
Images from
South Africa are again not different from the above. According to the findings
of Statistics South Africa, more than 94% of children between the age of seven
and fifteen attend school. But the further unpacking of this figure reveals
the ugliness of the picture. Among school-goers and adults, actual educational
attainment is very low. Children struggle to complete both primary and
secondary school. Very few people attend tertiary educational institutions. In
October 1999, 16% of South Africans aged 20 years or more said that they could
not read in at least one language. Ability to read in at least one language
varied by age, population group, sex and urban or non-urban place of
residence. The highest proportion of non-readers was found among the 4,5
million African women aged 20 years or more, living in non-urban areas
(26,6%). In other words these figures show that there has not been much
development in the educational standards of Africa and South Africa
respectively.
The problems
in Africa go deeper to include high inequality, uneven access to resources,
social exclusion and insecurity. Income
inequality is as high as that of Latin America.
In South Africa, for example, there is vast inequality. Along with
Brazil, South Africa is perhaps the most unequal economy. The poorest 20% of
the population disposes of just 3% of income, while the richest 20% disposes
of 42%. Inequality, for example between racial groups accounts for about 60%
of overall inequality, but inequality between racial groups accounts for 40%. The unemployed, household domestic workers, and farm workers
are the poorest and the most vulnerable groups (African Economic Research
Consortium, comparative research project on poverty and inequality in Africa,
quoted in World Bank 2000:94)
The
introduction of economic reforms in Africa, have also rubbed salt into the
wound. While these in some instances have improved macroeconomic management,
liberalized the markets and trade and widened the space for private sector
activity, in most cases their results have been devastating.
Mkandawire and Soludo (1999) argue that the results of these programs
have been devastatingly disastrous. Extreme
poverty and underdevelopment continue to plague the continent. Structural
adjustment programs (SAPS) have not answered Africa’s development problems.
The authors argue that after more than a decade of acrimonious debates and
tones of evaluation reports, there is an increasing convergence of views that
SAPS have not worked and that as designed, they are grossly defective as a
policy package for addressing the endemic poverty and pervasive
underdevelopment of the region (Mkandawire and Soludo 1999:Xi). Similarly,
Deng (1998) has argued that after a decade of economic structural adjustment
programs, Africa continues to be the sick man of the world, with multiple
signs of economic decay, civil strife resulting from social disintegration and
exclusion; deligitimation of the state; indebtedness, rising poverty and
threats of a creeping desert as well as recurrent drought (Deng 1998:1).
As
a result, various scholars have called for Africans and African governments to
take a new lead visa-vis foreign experts in charting a new course
through stabilization to long-term development.
Nepad has been initiated in this context[16].
In fact, recognizing the ongoing blame and counter blame by
“externalists” who put Africa’s problems on external factors and
“internalists” who put Africa’s problems on internal factors, Mkandawire
and Soludo take the middle line. They neither blame the external factors or
internal factors in exploring and prescribing Africa’s economic problems.
They instead use both in their exploration and prescription of Africa’s
economic predicaments. This is infact the route taken by the continental
project of Nepad, which among other things, recognizes internal and external
factors in Africa’s march to development but attempts to fuse rebirth of
Africa’s culture and tradition with positive elements of the global culture
informed by Africa’s history and the general environment.
In addition
to SAPS, Africa faces a major population explosion. In the 1960s Africa’s
population was estimated at 257 million. In 1982, it had increased to 482
million. Today it stands at approximately 680 million. The United Nations’
Economic Commission for Africa projects that in 2008, the population will have
risen to 1.1billion, implying an annual growth of 3.2 per cent for the next 6
years. South Africa’s
population, for example, as estimated by Statistics South Africa was 43,3
million in October 1999.[17]
It had increased to this number from 40,6 million in October 1996; the time of
the first population census after the first democratic elections in April
1994. 77,8% of the population was estimated to be African, with 10,5% being
white, 8,9% coloured and 2,6% Indian. The African population is gradually
increasing in size, not only in actual numbers from 30,6 million in 1995 to
33,7 million in 1999, but also in the proportion it represents of the total
population, from 77,1% in 1995 to 77,8% in 1999. On the other hand, the white
population, is estimated to be growing slightly in actual numbers, from 4,4
million in 1995 to 4,6 million in 1999, but proportionately it is gradually
shrinking from 11,2% in 1995 to 10,5% in 1999 (Statistics South Africa)[18]
These figures and those of the region show that halving poverty by 2015
requires an annual growth of more than 7%, along with a more equitable
distribution of income (World Bank 2000:2).
Lastly,
diseases and conflicts are common in Africa. 70% of the world’s HIV/AIDS
cases are in Africa. AIDS orphans constitute 11% of the population in the most
afflicted areas. In addition to the HIV/AIDS pandemic, there is the scourge of
wars and civil conflicts. Conflicts are also a common phenomenon in Africa.
About one fifth of Africans live in countries severely disrupted by conflict.
However
as stated earlier, Africa is a rich continent and Nepad acknowledges this[19].
When one looks at land, forests, water, and human resources in Africa, one
cannot help but wonder, what is wrong with Africa. The statistics given above
are depressing. They do not agree with the levels of resources in Africa.
Neither do they agree with the contribution of the non-profit sector. What
then is wrong? According to
Nepad, the legacy of colonialism[20],
the Cold War, the workings of the international economic system and the
inadequacies and inappropriateness of the policies pursued by many countries
in the post independence era are responsible for these ills (Nepad 2001: 4).
And Adebayo Adedeji (1985) thinks: demography, drought,
desertification, dependency, disequilibrium, debt, desertification and
destabilization are the causes.
True
as it may be that these are the causes of underdevelopment, an indication must
be made that there are many other factors that need to be looked at that
contribute to development or under development. For example, unique
historical, geographical or cultural influences may play an important role in
determining whether or how fast a country develops.
There is also a lot of literature that argues that the political and
economic choices, developing countries make, play an important role in
determining how well and how fast they develop. Good governance, for example,
appears to be important in the development process. For example, countries
that have a high measure of political stability and social order are more
likely to develop than countries that have experienced instability and chaos.
There
has, however, been a difficult and long debated question though. This question
is, what role does aid play in promoting development in Africa? Its difficulty
lies in the fact that first, the dynamics propelling material and social
development are extremely complex and are influenced by many factors, only
one of which is aid. Second, many social and economic trends may occur
together with the flow of aid, which makes determining causality elusive.
Third, there is no universally accepted framework for evaluating the impact of
aid activities. But perhaps it is only fair to say that although aid appears
to have only a marginal effect, it can either promote or hinder development,
depending on the environment in which that aid is used and the conditions
under which it is given. For example, aid given to countries that are well
governed and have adopted market oriented economic policies may provide a
boost to their development and visa-versa. For this reason, this paper
discusses development aid and attempts to make connections between what has
been given and what has been achieved. The author strongly believes that aid
is an effective determinant of development. Countries need aid to develop, but
the critical questions to be addressed are, what does it entail? When and how
does it work? Who has the capacity to make it facilitate development? Can it
really facilitate development? What are the conditions of aid? What is the
relationship between the aid giver and the recipient? These are some of the
questions that the next section attempts to unpack.
The
second category of literature is that which is based on evaluations, studies
and other empirical materials. These, unlike the polemic ones have tended to
be sober. The World Bank has done quantitative approaches to determine the
statistical relationship between aid flows and economic growth. The general
finding has been that when monetary, fiscal and trade policies in recipient
countries are taken into account, aid has a positive impact on growth in
supporting policy environments (Burnside and Dollar 1996, quoted in Lancaster,
9).
The study by Robert Cassen and others, Does Aid Work testifies
to this. It states that aid is effective in achieving its goals most of the
time. Joseph Stiglitz, former vice president and chief economist of the World
Bank, has also asked the same question that this type of literature is trying
to explore. In the paper, Can aid facilitate development? he argues
that aid can play a major and vital role in facilitating development. However
it can only do so in an environment of good policies, not just in the
recipient countries but also in donor countries. Stiglitz argues strongly that
aid can work but at times it has been counterproductive. For example, he says
that in some instances food aid has been motivated by the desire to get rid of
the mounting agricultural surpluses that result from the misguided and
distorted agricultural policies in many developed countries. The result has
been a decrease in agricultural prices in the developing world, which has in
turn contributed to poverty by robbing farmers of their livelihood.
At times has supported programs that are not sensitive to environmental
affects. And it has also created a culture of dependency and discouraged
countries from helping themselves.
In
these critical works, I find it only fair to say perhaps the focus of enquiry
should shift. Instead of asking does aid work, we should instead be asking
when does aid work and who makes aid work? We should be asking questions such
as: What is the environment in which it can facilitate development? Who has
the capacity to use aid effectively?
Using
both the instrumental and the contextual approach, the next section looks at
donor funding and the non-profit sector in South Africa. The questions that
the following section seeks to answer are: To what extent can aid promote or
hinder the non-profit sector in addressing the developmental challenges in
South Africa. In other words, can aid facilitate development?
What are the implications of the relation between donors and the
non-profit sector to the implementation and success of development models like
Nepad? What roles can donors and
the non-profits play? The paper discusses these issues in the light of the
size and state of the non-profit sector in South Africa, which has been
alluded to. This provides the rationale for the advocacy for the role of civil
society participation in development and in Nepad.
The following section argues that based on the size of the non-profit
sector in South Africa and across the world, there is every reason why the NPO
sector should partake in development. The section uses Nepad to illustrate the
argument
Section
four
However
this is not to say there are no challenges that NGOs and donors meet in the
relationship. The position that Interfund occupies presents an example of
challenges that other intermediary organizations may be facing in South
Africa. Interfund finds itself having to satisfy many donor demands and yet
still be accountable to the community-based organizations that it supports.
This calls for the need for donors, intermediaries and NGOs to engage in
constructive negotiations, not only upwards but also downwards regarding
programme areas and projects. Problems
on the ground must inform policy as well as set donor and NPO priorities. As
stated by Alice Brown (Ford Foundation), the agenda must be set not by the
donor or the NPO but rather by the context. It thus follows that this paper
should conclude that while there are many challenges that NPOs face in South
Africa, they have not shown signs of implementing the agendas of donors,
neither have they been found in relations that can be described as too close
for comfort. To make sure they do not find themselves in such relationships,
NPOs have worked towards sustaining themselves by diversifying their
funding.
The
main argument is that both donors and civil society are working to meet the
challenges of development in South Africa. It is for this reason that the two
can play a significant role in the implementation of Nepad. All (donors, NPOs
and Nepad) aim at alleviating poverty and attaining sustainable development.
The adoption of Nepad is one of the most important developments of recent
times for its conception of a development programme that places Africa at the
apex of the global agenda. Emphasizing African ownership, Nepad expects the
following outcomes:
·
Economic growth and
development and increased employment;
·
Restore peace,
security and stability;
·
Halt the
marginalisation of Africa in the globalisation process;
·
Reduction in
poverty and inequality;
·
Diversification of
productive activities;
·
Enhanced
international competitiveness and increased exports; and
·
Increased African
integration
These
same aspirations in Nepad are objectives of most donors and NPOs. All want to
promote democratic principles and institutions, popular participation, good
governance as well as peace, security and stability in the continent. In
essence Nepad, NPOs and donors aim at putting Africa back on its track. For
many years Africa has depended on the West as the Big Brother, and these can
help Africa build up her own identity, self-confidence and self-reliance.
But they can only do so if they allow the participation of the non-profit
sector and the development partners in the process. An incorporation of the
non-profit sector brings along the optimism entrenched in the Nepad document
and the aspirations of the AU, in halving poverty.
The
need to recognize the importance of civil society’s contribution towards
development as has been stated can best be illustrated by the state and scope
of the non-profit sector in South Africa discussed in the previously. The
relationship between civil society and the non-profit sector should be also
conducive for development to take place. As a result there are thus, many
areas in which civil society, with the help of donors can intervene to push
the development agenda forward if it participates especially in Nepad.
Sites
of intervention
Reduction
of armed conflict and conflict management
First,
Nepad’s first task is to reduce the impact of armed conflict on civilians.
As the situation stands, virtually the whole continent is affected by conflict
and this is a major barrier to investment and development. The World Bank
calculates that conflicts cost every African country around 2% of economic
growth every year. This means that conflict resolution can have dramatic
effects on development. The case of Sierra Leone demonstrates how with the
concerted effort of civil society and international community, conflict can be
ended and nation building put into place. The Democratic Republic of Congo is
another. Civil society can play an important role in the Peace and Security
Initiative.
Increasing
economic growth
Second,
civil society should intervene in increasing economic growth. As stated
earlier, Africa has witnessed slow growth and as a result there is pervasive
poverty. To halve poverty by 2015, the economies of sub-Saharan Africa need to
grow by 7%each year up to 2015. This is a big task that needs concerted
efforts from various development agents. The picture is not gloomy especially
if one considers that countries like Uganda, Botswana and Mozambique are
almost meeting the demand. The
same may happen in Ghana, Tanzania and Ethiopia if their commitments to reform
are maintained. Nepad can only achieve growth needed to halve poverty in the
continent if it commits itself strongly to better economic and political
governance. Democracy as part of good governance has increasingly become
necessary so that the poor people can be heard. Good governance is a right of
all people everywhere and is a precondition for economic growth and poverty
reduction. A classic example of why good governance is important is the
unfolding situation in Zimbabwe. The government has turned authoritarian and
this has worsened the economy. This demonstrates the importance of the rule of
law both for economic development and for justice and security for the poor.
As watch dogs of the state, civil society organizations can play a very
influential role to monitor and make sure that African leaders stick to their
commitments and implement them. Civil society has a role to play in the
Economic and Social Council.
Curbing
corruption to invest in human development
It
can also help curb corruption that has characterized most of the African
leaders. Donors can play a positive role here by withholding aid from those
governments that do not meet the good governance and democracy standards.
And they can use the money to support massive campaigns by advocacy
groups against corrupt practices by governments and multinational companies.
Donors can help in aiding civil society invest in people. Nepad’s success
depends so much on human investment and development. There is need for rapid
progress in delivering more education and effective healthcare. The World
Health Organisation stipulates that lack of health care is a huge barrier to
economic development. High levels of diseases such as HIV/AIDS are a major
hindrance to development in Africa. The 25 million Africans infected with AIDS
are bound to be a major economic cost for years to come. But recent
developments in Senegal and Uganda have demonstrated that levels of infection
can be held down (Senegal) or drastically reduced (Uganda) through a strong
commitment to public education, testing, treatment of sexually transmitted
diseases and widespread availability of condoms. Civil society can best do
these roles. It has the capacity to do so. In South Africa, for example, the
Treatment Action Campaign has done a lot in this field; hence its
incorporation in Nepad would be necessarily productive.
Like
healthcare, education is a basic right that underpins economic development.
Recent research shows that the single most powerful investment that any
country can make to speed up its development is to educate a generation of
children of all sexes. A lot of civil society organizations are working
together with their donors on the education sector and as such they can
contribute to development.
Lessons
so far
These
sites of civil society’s intervention, underscore the importance Nepad
should have placed in consulting with the people and civil society.
From the onset, Nepad seeks to promote sustainable, people centered
development. A fundamental component of such a plan ought to be the role of
civil society in formulating such a plan. This is so especially given the
experience of grassroots movements in developing strategies to deal with the
enduring history of under development on the continent. This paper holds that
it was erroneous for the framers not to include civil society in the
formulation of the plan. Had civil society been included, there is a chance
that the plan would not have been top down as it stands today. The
developmental approach used by Nepad framers seems to be the one based on a
vision of basic needs, based on the model of Maslow’s needs hierarchy (from
physiological to self-actualization). This development model, or the human
needs approach underscores the need to feed, clothe and house people
(if ever this happens). The other things are to come later on. This paradigm
treats people as recipients of aid and development, rather than as agents of
their own development. As a result it tends to be top-down and limited,
bypassing people’s own capacity, creativity, history, culture and sense of
value and community (Rader 1990:229).
By
failing to consult with civil society and the people, Nepad did exactly the
same. It ignored the politics of development. Peter Urvin (1998) writes that
in such a scenario, the development enterprise is capable of working even with
repressive governments as long as they seem to be capable of promoting
development as defined by technocrats. The
participation of civil society in Nepad would have helped avoid defining
development without the people’s input, and would have made the plan
beneficiary to the people that it seeks to develop.
Instead Nepad worked with World Bank officials and other technocrats who
obviously are biased towards the poor and underdeveloped. These officials or
their nature of development is fundamentally flawed in the sense that they
approached development from two fundamental assumptions, first: that they have
the knowledge and the poor do not. Second, even though entrenched in the first
assumption is the belief that the poor are under developed and they are not.
These
assumptions have serious implications. First they imply that the
underdeveloped cannot be put at the centre of development enterprise. The
development plan does not start with their talents, knowledge and aspirations.
This is the reason why it becomes top-down. Second, these assumptions produce
ignorance. A tendency to think that the underdeveloped need exactly what the
technocrats think they can provide is created. This is exactly what Nepad
framers have created. Nepad went against a well-established principle in the
mainstream development theory, that for development policies to have any hope
of success, they ought to involve the people in whose name they are being
proposed.
A
participation of civil society would also have meant Nepad is not gender
insensitive, despite its stated objective of the need to empower women. Women
form the greater part of the poor and of civil society. Their exclusion in
Nepad has very serious implications. Gender is a critical aspect of
development, especially sustainable development. One cannot just look at
development from the economic growth perspective in isolation from the other
fundamental building blocks of development, like healthcare, education, and
economic opportunities for women. Had women been consulted, the outcome would
have been a much-improved document in terms of gender sensitivity. Women have
long voiced their concerns about economic reforms and the marketisation of
governance. In particular gender advocates have underlined that current trends
indicate that states are being reorganized to serve the interests of the
market forces and these interests do not coincide with those of the
dispossessed. These concerns are very relevant to Nepad in that if women and
civil society organizations are not included, it is likely to perpetuate the
economic and social exclusion of the poor women while further entrenching
patriarchal patterns in politics.
In order to ensure poverty alleviation, the framers of Nepad should
envision a major paradigmatic shift from the neo liberal economic orthodoxy to
a development model that builds on a broad based dialogue-inclusive of women,
the poor, racially and other marginalized groups.
Good
governance is not only the sole responsibility of governments. A vibrant and
diverse civil society is also needed to hold governments accountable. The
freedoms of association, assembly, information resulting from political
transitions have expanded civic activism throughout Africa. Civil society
organizations have an important role to play in articulating the popular
interests, monitoring government performance and facilitating participation in
governance. Public education and
dissemination of information are among the most significant functions of civil
society organizations.
The media have an important role to play in this regard.
Civil society must be vigilant in ensuring that African leaders remain
true to their commitments as enunciated in both the Constitutive Act of the AU
and the principles of the Nepad process.
This
is all the reason why civil society organizations should take part in a
development model like Nepad, which provides real opportunities. Civil society
identifies with positive features in Nepad, such as:
·
The need to
negotiate a new relationship with Africa’s development partners
·
The focus on
“African ownership and management”
·
The notion of
self-reliance
·
The importance of
regional and national priorities in the formulation of development plans
·
The notion that
these plans must be formulated through participatory processes involving the
people
·
Halving poverty by
2015
These
principles are noble and summarize at least some of the most important
aspirations that everyone shares. What needs to be done better than has is to
define the ‘how’ and the ‘what’. How can a vicious cycle of
collaboration be ensured? What are issues of common interest defined? These
are questions that need serious engagement.
Conclusion
This
paper concludes by reiterating the need for civil society to participate in
development models like Nepad, the current model of development in Africa.
Civil society/ or the non-profit sector as shown in the discussion is a large
sector, whose contribution to GDP must not be taken lightly. It is an
important partner to the state and the market in the development enterprise.
As such it must be taken along in any development project that seeks the
betterment of the African people. The sector works with the people and among
the people, and to leave it behind is counter-productive. It is in this light
that the paper argued for the participation of civil society and development
partners in the Nepad especially in the resolution of conflicts, improvement
of economic, social and human development. Civil society can help reverse
forces of marginalisation and underdevelopment.
[1]
School
of Social Sciences, Department of Political Studies, P.Bag 3, WITS, 2050,
University of Witwatersrand, SOUTH AFRICA. bhekinkosimoyo@hotmail.com
[7]
See also, the structural-operational definition of NGOs by Terje Tvedt
(1998). Tvedt’s definition emphasizes not only the purposes of the
organizations or their sources of income but their basic structure and
operation. It identifies as basic the following features: formally
constituted, non-governmental (private), self-governing, non-profit
distributing and voluntary (Tvedt, 1998:16).
[14]
The above figures and discussion on South Africa are based on the findings
of the Statistics South Africa’s South
Africa in transition Selected
findings from the October household survey of 1999and
changes that have occurred between 1995 and 1999
[18]
See
Statistics South Africa: South
Africa in transition; Selected
findings from the October
household survey of 1999 and
changes that have occurred between 1995 and 1999 (http://www.statssa.org.za)
[25]
Moyo (2002) Paper presented to the 8th International
Interdisciplinary Congress on Women, Department of Women and Gender
Studies, Makerere University, Uganda, 21-26th, July 2002